CommandOfThe21st
Frank Row (1)
On the contrary I'd say that this Grammar Senior A team has been one of the most pressured and badgered ever.
NSW Schools Debating 2023
- Thread starter Lindommer
- Start date
Debating4life
Bob McCowan (2)
I won’t get into a green and gold debate over this, but topic two really isn’t as neg weighted as it may seem to you at first glance. The chief adjudicator isn’t an idiot and selects the topics in a legitimate fashion, with the resources she has available. I find it unbelievable that this forum constantly argues over everything from complaining about adjudicator quality, when the ISDA is a 32 school competition across 8 years, to complaining about whether high school teams should have reached the stage they are in.
I’m rather disappointed actually that it’s so unclear to some members what constitutes badgering. The debater-esque euphemisms and roundabout ways of insulting, and simply making negative comments on teams absolutely does not go over these high schoolers’ heads. They read them, they understand them, and they are affected by them.
I’m using Grammar as an example because it’s what has occurred this year, but it has occurred with plenty of schools in years past including High and Abottsleigh. I just want these members to consider that Grammar has won against aloys unanimously in clean sweep of 4 issues, with a historic audience. Despite this fact, I have seen consistently negative commentary on this team with merely rhetorical and anecdotal basis. For these types of comments on talent and skill to be made on a unanimously winning ISDA team, I think this speaks volumes on the nature of this forum.
No, I do not agree with the Grammar diehards that it is anti-Grammar bias. It is simply a group of people on this forum, excluding members such as Debater, who cannot find anything better to do than to make negative comments on high school - high school - teams. Or maybe their years of debating have desensitised them to emotional impact.
As was told to me by some circuit coaches I've been speaking with, this forum is a frequent matter of discussion among debating coordinators and school senior staff, for all the wrong reasons.
Moving onto GPS, I hope this might change.
A huge congrats to both Aloys and Grammar teams for reaching the grand finals. It was well deserved by both teams which are both excellent. Well done to Grammar for their ultimate victory, and well done to Aloys for their runners up position.
for members of those teams reading this, please do not listen to members of this forum. Your excellence is proven through your achievements; your achievements are deeply commendable. You will no doubt all go on to achieve even greater and better things in the future.
Last edited:
Debater
Herbert Moran (7)
All of this is very interesting, I think the list of state callbacks is further back in the forum somewhere if you are looking for names. Not sure just a name helps too much though.
Debating4life
Bob McCowan (2)
From the list from those schools:
Joeys:
- John Toohey (ISDA Senior A semi-finalist)
Riverview:
- Joshua O'Dea (ISDA Senior A quarter-finalist)
Grammar:
- Kasra Roushan (ISDA Senior A champion)
- Tyson Lieu
- Will Ellis (ISDA Senior A champion)
Last edited:
Closing_Gov
Frank Row (1)
Just to clarify, do you consider your own comments about the Aloys team to be "negative commentary"?
Debating4life
Bob McCowan (2)
I will quote what I have said:
1. "I’ve heard that one Aloys speaker has become quite strong in recent years"
2. "That said, I have heard similarly excellent things about the Aloys team, with that one speaker in particular becoming quite strong in the past two years."
3. "but given the form of Aloys this year, in a match up between the best teams in NSW debating, it will be a very high quality debate to watch."
4. "A huge congrats to both Aloys and Grammar teams for reaching the grand finals. It was well deserved by both teams which are both excellent. Well done to Grammar for their ultimate victory, and well done to Aloys for their runners up position.
for members of those teams reading this, please do not listen to members of this forum. Your excellence is proven through your achievements; your achievements are deeply commendable. You will no doubt all go on to achieve even greater and better things in the future."
5. "Interesting that they did not veto it. The other motions, from what I've heard, were quite aff weighted.
Proves that doing topic selection well is an integral part of debating; Aloys failure to do it well is not an excuse, for the many in this forum who seem to be Aloys diehards after their badgering of Grammar team over the course of the finals, even after they were proven wrong in their predictions by a unanimous decision.
I wish that the sportsmanship, commentary, and method of supporting teams in ISDA debating, especially for those who are not even in high school, would improve. They're just kids, and they most likely read this forum and don't deserve to go into their debates with the kind of negative commentary so prevalent on this forum. Some members of Senior A teams are as young as 16."
So, on that last one - as is abundantly clear given the nature of my previous comments, the statement about their topic selection comes in response to members (after badgering the team throughout the whole season) continuing to put down their opposition and invalidate the unanimous victory. It is abundantly clear that it comes with the context of refuting the badgering, and ill-natured support of high school ISDA teams. Aloys is an excellent team. I have never suggested otherwise. I am simply calling out the maliciousness of this forum to school teams (including many more than just Grammar) across the years.
CommandOfThe21st
Frank Row (1)
Could you provide a quote that you consider to be negative?
Closing_Gov
Frank Row (1)
Thank you! Very happy that you acknowledge that "Aloys is an excellent team" and that you "have never suggested otherwise." Assume that you retract your comment on topic selection that "Aloys failure to do it well is not an excuse." Also assume you retract point 5 regarding the other motions being "quite aff weighted" given that it is widely acknowledged that the two topics debated by Seniors in the Grand Final were significantly neg weighted. Thanks again.
Debater
Herbert Moran (7)
Just like to note that the adjudicator you guys are talking about was actually on the aff on that topic, not on the neg. The uni version was a very good debate, 1N was fantastic.
CommandOfThe21st
Frank Row (1)
Like to note here that this comment was based off the information available at the time, and that talking about the importance of topic selection hardly seems like lecturing school kids.
The rest was directed at those on the forum that were unreasonably unsupportive and negative towards the grammar team, note criticism of 'Aloys diehards' rather than the team.
Debating4life
Bob McCowan (2)
I'm a bit disappointed that diehards have made accounts today to make sarcastic remarks. Thank you Commandofthe21st to clarifying as well.
The first post did not insinuate any truth to whether or not the adj's history had an effect on the debate. I reasonably thought it was an interesting piece of information that the outlier on the panel had debated this topic before. This could also imply that they would have a better understanding of the topic, and would have made the correct decision. Unfortunately, due to the sheer volume of snarky euphemisms and dogwhistles which go on in this forum, people are used to seeing simple facts from neutral members as insinuations to the contrary.
The suggestion about topic selection came after the undercutting of the unanimous victory - you can't pick and choose what you like to view as insinuations. It is important to highlight the importance of topic selection when members are using it as a scapegoat
It was not the tipping of Aloys and Grammar with which there is an issue. As Commandofthe21st suggests as well, there has been a lot of pressure and badgering which came with the tipping.
Listing names of debaters, without any commentary on how bad any of them are, is of course fine, as Debater has rightly done frequently. There was no comment on my part on "respective chances" only a suggestion that Grammar should be well positioned for GPS given they won the ISDA. Nothing negative or directly comparative, given Aloys is in CAS.
Finally, please do gloss over the positive comments I made about Aloys even after the finals. It was no clarification that they are an excellent team; that was something I said very early after the result came out. "A huge congrats to Aloys and Grammar for reaching the grand finals...well done to aloys for their runners up position"
Honestly, well done, and lets echo positive commentary on this forum.
If you are trying to deny that there is negative commentary, I don't think you have read what has been happening on green and gold for the past few years.
Who specifically is undercutting the grammar victory ? The only comments about Grammar being on the right side of the topic came from Cranbrook and a self-confessed Grammar diehard - just read their posting history !
like you I was surprised alos didn’t veto the topic until I saw the full list of topics. This is not undercutting.
I’ve not seen or heard anything disputing the grammar victory so unsure why you’re so touchy about it. And not everyone who disagrees with you are diehards either nor are they anti-grammar.
in any case I agree with your call for a more encouraging forum environment so will leave it at that.
Debating4life
Bob McCowan (2)
Yes you're right about the topic comment, after looking at it again. I was mistakenly conflating a few comments into the same idea which were actually made before the finals. But yes, final sentiment stands.
And just before the grand final I did liken the Grammar team to wobbling in which was poor on my part and I may have compared them to prior Grammar teams in previous posts
I will rear my head again to say that the tone of discussion on this forum is not productive. Accuse me of verballing all you want, but I assure you that school coordinators continue to be unhappy with this thread in a way they haven't in years past. Parents, students and coaches are all commenting here, some out of genuine interest (but perhaps with a bit of a warped perspective as to what is acceptable), with some just baiting and trolling. It would not surprise me if the competitions moved to invoke a code of conduct banning public discussion which qualitatively evaluates students/specific teams (or even a wholesale ban). I implore you all to frame your commentary in positive terms. As a whole, the competitions are managed by teachers who care about students and their wellbeing (indeed, they are obligated to) more than ensuring olympic quality competition (although there is no doubt that they care a lot and recognise the importance of the competitions to many).
Norman burns
Bob McCowan (2)
St Aloysius the best debaters in the NSW schools system
Any different takes?
Any different takes?
bill clune
Bob McCowan (2)
I've heard multiple accounts with a school down in Georges Hall, the school is Georges River Grammar, apparently, they are up there with their debating skills.
Opening.gov
Frank Row (1)
Having spoken to multiple attendees of the grand final of Aloys against Grammar, I’ve heard that the 3rd speaker of Aloys, Christian, I believe, was a very strong speaker.
Daniel Lloyd-Hurwitz and Kasra Roushan of the Grammar team, however, apparently gave notably outstanding speeches, unanimously winning them the debate. From this, I think that team would take the title instead.
DebatingNerd
Allen Oxlade (6)
Congrats to Grammar on their win, condolences to Aloys who have had a incredibly strong run this year.
It was a fantastic final, with a huge crowd turnout.
See? Not that hard. If you think a comment you have will put a kid/team down? Don't put it up.
e.g. You can say "Grammar is in top form this year, I think they will win ISDA."
See how that doesn't put anyone down but still applauds a team that is doing well? Not that hard.
It's so childish how some members of this forum are mud-slinging about this matter. And honestly, I'm on board with Debating4life here. It's so stupid and so clear when you are clearly backing one team and one team only.
Yes, the Grammar team is being congratulated on the forum. But it's not because of a pro-Grammar bias on the forum. It's because they won the premiership
I haven't been as active on this forum as of recently but this is all so incredibly stupid. Please grow up and hopefully the commentary is far more civil going into the GPS season.
It was a fantastic final, with a huge crowd turnout.
See? Not that hard. If you think a comment you have will put a kid/team down? Don't put it up.
e.g. You can say "Grammar is in top form this year, I think they will win ISDA."
See how that doesn't put anyone down but still applauds a team that is doing well? Not that hard.
It's so childish how some members of this forum are mud-slinging about this matter. And honestly, I'm on board with Debating4life here. It's so stupid and so clear when you are clearly backing one team and one team only.
Yes, the Grammar team is being congratulated on the forum. But it's not because of a pro-Grammar bias on the forum. It's because they won the premiership
I haven't been as active on this forum as of recently but this is all so incredibly stupid. Please grow up and hopefully the commentary is far more civil going into the GPS season.
DebatingNerd
Allen Oxlade (6)
Oh and the topic selection for the grand-final was not that bad. CA's for a tourno have some brains when setting the final motions esp for a competition as prestigious as ISDA.
The second motion is debatable and the last one is pretty even. There is no secret state agenda against the Aloys teams. Condolences for the boys but bad topic selections happens for anyone - even the cream of the crop. Unlucky, but they can keep their chins up knowing they had a fantastic run.
The second motion is debatable and the last one is pretty even. There is no secret state agenda against the Aloys teams. Condolences for the boys but bad topic selections happens for anyone - even the cream of the crop. Unlucky, but they can keep their chins up knowing they had a fantastic run.